Yay way to solve a issue internally great job i think this will be a good move with odrick & Langford on the ends...Can Merling Play OLB? at all?

Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:08 pm

phinsfansc

Phinfever Draft Insider

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pmPosts: 3700Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

No, but Phillip can provide depth at the DE/DT position.

_________________

Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:22 pm

The Hen

Phinfever Live! Radio Host

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:15 amPosts: 6945Location: ELP, TX.

Re: Starks to NT

Iowafin wrote:

The Hen wrote:

Iowa, this is Ireland talking......LOL

Sparano and Nolan will have the final say, I would think. He did say , "not to give away any stratagy". LOL

The "versatility" they have added has me thinking alot of things.

Anyway's, the Ireland PC is on MD.com

Yeah, I know, you just said you figured they'd get a NT elsewhere and not put Starks there. That, to me, almost makes Odrick as a wasted pick...I just don't think you draft depth guys in the first round.

I never said they won't put him there....what I thought I said was that they would bring in someone else into the mix....should have added "to compete."

Agreed. Merling has the size to move into a 3 technique on obvious passing downs. Him and Odrick inside with Wake and either Misi or Anderson on the outside should be able to put adequate pressure on the quarterback.

Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:19 am

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 5886

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

Worst idea in the history of ideas.

Starks is not an NT. I don't care if we're talking hyrbrid or pure 3-4. We've all seen what happens when he mans the position.

_________________

Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:29 am

jammer

2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pmPosts: 6512Location: Topsfield, MA

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

If this is true it makes for 5 guys who can rotate in and out of the nose - Ferguson, Soliai, Starks, Odrick and McDaniel. Certainly could keep players fresh.

If Starks can do it it solves an enormous need.

Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:54 am

catman_56

Phinfever Hall of Famer

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:37 pmPosts: 894Location: Orlando, Fl

Re: Starks to NT

I think part of the reason that Odrick was drafted is because he can play inside or outside. Bill Parcells likes competition and Odrick puts pressure on Langford, Merling, Starks, McDaniel, and Solai to produce.

I like the idea of Starks playing nose sometimes and playing end other times. He is emerging as a force that can really disrupt offenses.

Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:43 am

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 5886

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

jammer wrote:

If this is true it makes for 5 guys who can rotate in and out of the nose - Ferguson, Soliai, Starks, Odrick and McDaniel. Certainly could keep players fresh.

If Starks can do it it solves an enormous need.

We already know he can't. We've already seen when he had to man that position.

This is retarded. Starks has failed there before. Why would they do that? Idiots... should have taken Cody when they had the chance.

Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:28 am

Rich

Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 amPosts: 22180Location: Miami, FL

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

Rock Sexton wrote:

Worst idea in the history of ideas.

Starks is not an NT. I don't care if we're talking hyrbrid or pure 3-4. We've all seen what happens when he mans the position.

We've all seen what happens when he mans the position when he hasn't played or practiced it.

_________________

Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:28 am

Phins Rock

Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 amPosts: 7532Location: Massachusetts

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

Guys. Odrick cannot and will not play NG.

Jeff Ireland has already said that what he meant by the "inside or outside" think was outside in base 34 situations, and he can move back inside on 4 D-line sets (dime, nickel, etc.). He's not going to play NT though.

Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:02 am

fonzy

Phinfever All Pro

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:12 amPosts: 347

Re: Very interesting read on Randy Starks move and tweaks to 3-4

Has Starks had experience as a NT before?

_________________

Sat Apr 24, 2010 10:02 am

Iowafin

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pmPosts: 5439

Re: Starks to NT

The Hen wrote:

Iowafin wrote:

The Hen wrote:

Iowa, this is Ireland talking......LOL

Sparano and Nolan will have the final say, I would think. He did say , "not to give away any stratagy". LOL

The "versatility" they have added has me thinking alot of things.

Anyway's, the Ireland PC is on MD.com

Yeah, I know, you just said you figured they'd get a NT elsewhere and not put Starks there. That, to me, almost makes Odrick as a wasted pick...I just don't think you draft depth guys in the first round.

I never said they won't put him there....what I thought I said was that they would bring in someone else into the mix....should have added "to compete."

Gotchya

_________________

Sat Apr 24, 2010 10:05 am

eleaf

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:49 amPosts: 4144Location: The Bluegrass

Re: Starks to NT

IamPZ wrote:

I'm just saying... I don't think these guys are so much looking for guys who can go out there and play a certain number of snaps... I think they're looking for guys who perform at a high level when they are out there... get a bunch of guys together who can perform at a high level then you have the luxury of continuously swapping players in and out without much difference in the talent level.

Sparano is obsessive about player snap counts and trying to limit them based on position. There are some guys who will play every snap, but there are guys, even guys we might consider money, who are purposefully limited in field time so as not to wear them down too much.

_________________A good RB is nice, a good QB even better, but it's best to be able to stop someone first.